NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER
SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
1
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
FOREWORD
Foreword
Research is considered as one of the cornerstones of anti-corruption social movement worldwide.
Corruption anywhere is a clandestine process. Therefore, to learn about its nature and magnitude, its
actors and its impact on life and livelihood of ordinary citizens, proper research is essential. A country
may have strong commitment against corruption from the highest political echelon with policies and
infrastructure in place, however, corruption may still be a challenge for various reasons. Thus it is
paramount to understand the nature and attributes of corruption prevailing in society so that we can
make the mission against corruption successful. Research will help generate the information and
data needed to understand the causes as well as the appropriate measures to be taken to eliminate
corruption.
Bhutan Transparency Initiative will continue to formulate a suitable research strategy that contributes
more effectively towards generating knowledge on the corruption situation in the country. In line
with this strategy, Bhutan Transparency Initiative is very pleased to present the National Corruption
Barometer Survey 2016 Report. The study sought information on the levels of corruption, forms of
corruption, delivery of Public services by public offices, effectiveness and support of existing anticorruption initiatives, access to anti -corruption services, delivery of justice and in general the degree
of corruption in the country.
It must be admitted that this research on corruption situation in the country is still limited and unable
to answer many questions, particularly, on the dynamics of corruption at various sectoral, sub-sectoral
and institutional levels both nationally and locally. The interventions against corruption need to match
the causes in order for anti corruption actions to be effective. This study will serve as a baseline for
BTI as the findings highlight indicators that are useful for assessing the general level of corruption
experience and perception. Detailed dynamics or qualitative information on the process and events are
outside the scope of this type of study.
BTI will use the findings of the report to design relevant interventions to strengthen initiatives against
corruption.
I take this opportunity to reiterate that BTI will continue to work with the relevant institutions to advise
on how to seal the corruption loopholes existent in their systems, processes, procedures and practices.
I would also like to acknowledge and thank the respondents from the general public for their frank
participation during the Survey and look forward to their continued support in our future endeavors.
Finally, I call upon all to read this Report and work with us to enhance transparency and accountability
in our country.
Pema Lhamo
Executive Director
3
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
4
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
7
1. BACKGROUND
9
2. STUDY METHODOLOGY
2.1. Study Design
2.2. Target Population and Study Sample
2.3. Sampling Procedures
2.3.1. Sample Size Determination
2.3.2. Sample Allocation
2.4. Data Collection Method
2.5. Weighting
2.6. Data Tabulation and Analysis
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
11
11
3. FINDINGS
3.1. Coverage of the Study
3.2. Demographics 3.2.1. Gender
3.2.2. Age
3.2.3. Educational Background
3.2.4. Marital Status
3.2.5. Occupation
3.3. Forms of Corruption
3.4. Causes of Corruption
3.5. Concentration of Corruption
3.6. Corruption in Public Service Delivery
3.7. Important Problems Facing the Country
3.8. Level of Corruption
3.9. Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC)
3.10. Combating Corruption
12
12
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
22
23
24
27
28
30
31
4. RECOMMENDATIONS
36
5. CONCLUSION
37
REFERENCES38
ANNEXES39
Annex 1: Tables and Figures
39
Annex 2: Survey Questionnaire
43
5
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Respondents by rural and urban
Figure 2: Respondents by region
Figure 3: Respondents by sex
Figure 4: Respondents by age group
Figure 5: Respondents by qualification
Figure 6: Respondents by marital status
Figure 7: Respondents by occupation
Figure 8: Bribery rate by essential government services
Figure 9: Bribery by area
Figure 10: Bribery by region
Figure 11: Bribery by sex
Figure 12: Bribery by formal education
Figure 13: Mean score of individuals involved in corruption
Figure 14: Mean score of current government’s performance
Figure 15: Mean score of ordinary citizens’ role
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Views on the forms of corruption prevalent in the country
Table 2: Views on the forms of corruption by area
Table 3: Views on the forms of corruption by sex
Table 4: Views on the forms of corruption by age group
Table 5: Views on the forms of corruption by educational status
Table 6: Views on the forms of corruption by region
Table 7: Views on the forms of corruption by occupation
Table 8: Experiences of accessing certain essential government services
Table 9: Reporting bribery incidents
Table 10: Action taken against or retaliation suffered
Table 11: Views on the causes of corruption prevalent in the country
Table 12: Reasons for not reporting corruption incidents
Table 13: Views on the concentration of corruption in the country
Table 14: Satisfaction with the quality of service delivery
Table 15: Problems encountered while accessing public services
Table 16: Common problems encountered
Table 17: Views on individuals involved in corruption
Table 18: The most important problem(s) facing the country
Table 19: Views on the level of corruption since the introduction of democracy
Table 20: Views on the level of corruption over the past year
Table 21: Level of corruption over the past year
Table 22: Knowledge of anti-corruption
Table 23: Perception of Anti-corruption Commission
Table 24: ACC’s performance rating
Table 25: Ruling party versus the opposition in fighting corruption
Table 26: Current government’s performance
Table 27: Things an ordinary person can do to help combat corruption
Table 28: Ordinary citizens’ role
Table 29: Willingness to report corruption cases even
if they would have to spend a day in court to give evidence
Table 30: Power of ordinary citizens
6
12
12
12
13
13
14
14
20
20
20
21
21
26
31
33
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
19
21
21
22
23
23
24
25
26
27
27
28
29
29
30
30
30
31
32
32
33
34
35
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The National Corruption Barometer Survey (NCBS) was conducted by Bhutan Transparency Initiative to assess
the Bhutanese citizens’ perception of corruption and to establish a reference point for awareness, education, and
advocacy on corruption prevention. It was the first survey of its kind ever conducted in Bhutan.
The survey adopted a mix research method (quantitative as well as qualitative), with a sample size of 1,200.
Respondents from rural areas made up 61% and 39% were from urban areas. Those with middle and higher
secondary education made up the bulk of the respondents (35.5 percent); those with postgraduate education
made up only 2.1% of the respondents.
The study revealed that corruption in favouritism and nepotism in recruitment, promotion and transfer were the
most prevalent forms of corruption in the country. Among occupational groups, civil servants and students were
the main respondents (43.8% each) who reported the occurrence. Deliberately delaying decisions with corrupt
motives was perceived as another significantly (66.8%) form that was prevalent in the country.
A higher proportion of urban citizens reported the prevalence of all forms of corruption, and the people below the
age of 25 years were found to be more concerned about it. Furthermore, citizens with formal education reported
a much higher prevalence of corruption in the country than those with no formal education.
A total of 10.2% of the citizens reported having paid a bribe in the past 12 months. At least 2.6% of the citizens
reported of bribing a government official to get the documents they needed. The proportion of citizens who paid
a bribe was significantly higher in the urban areas (14.3%) than in rural areas (6.16%).
Discriminatory and non-uniform application of laws and rules were perceived to be the major causes of corruption
in the country. Other noticeable factors include lengthy procedures, weak and ineffective media and a strong
protective social net of those accused of corrupt actions.
The study also revealed that there is a dearth of motivation among the Bhutanese people to report corruption.
This was because most of them believed that no action would be taken even if they reported against corruption
to the concerned authorities; worse of all, they believed that their reporting would not make any difference. A
more worrying finding yet is that a quarter of the population (25.32%) thought that corruption was a normal social
phenomena since everyone indulged in it, and there was nothing wrong with it. Thus, there is a high level of
acceptance of corruption in the country.
Some 13.43% of the population thought that combating corruption would be an uphill task since it would mean
taking on a powerful nexus of judges, bureaucrats, politicians, and businessmen. This is because, as clearly
indicated by the study, people thought that corruption was highly concentrated at the top decision-making level.
In terms of the quality of service delivery, the respondents rated the Ministry of Education (MOE)as the best,
followed by the Ministry of Health (MOH) and the armed forces. On the contrary, the Ministry of Labour and
Human Resources (MOLHR), the judiciary and the private sector were rated as the worst (the least user-friendly
entities!).
Preferential treatment given to influential people was reported to affect ordinary citizens’ access to basic services.
And, this was pointed out as one of the major problems in the health sector.
7
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
A high proportion of the population perceived judges as corrupt; more than half of the population (63.2%) reported
of some judges being corrupt while 31.1% of the respondents reported that most judges as being corrupt.
For almost half of the respondents (46.5%), unemployment was the most important problem facing the country,
and they attributed the root cause of this problem to the poor quality of education in the country.
Furthermore, a sizeable proportion of the population (15.6%) cited the access to justice as the most important
problem facing the country.
In a nutshell, the general perception of the people was that the corruption level in the country has been steadily
increasing since the introduction of democracy.
Close to a quarter of the population (24.17%) stated that ordinary citizens cannot do anything substantial to curb
corruption. The urban population is more optimistic about the difference the ordinary citizens can make in the
fight against corruption.
8
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
1. BACKGROUND
Bhutan Transparency Initiative (BTI) was founded in April 2013 by a group of volunteers who came together to
establish a reference institution to put corruption under the spotlight by increasing transparency, integrity and
accountability in Bhutan through the provision of policy-oriented research, development of training tools and
facilitation of policy dialogues. BTI registered itself as a Civil Society Organisation (CSO) with the CSO Authority
of Bhutan in 2014.
BTI looks forward to a country of Gross National Happiness (GNH) with citizens and governments free from the
fear of corruption through the promotion of transparency, accountability and good governance in the country to
contribute to the fight against corruption and the promotion of integrity.
BTI engages in:
 Diagnosis of corruption issues to use findings as a reference to stimulate a more informed debate and to
formulate more projects on anti-corruption;
 Building and supporting partnerships and coalitions of civil society organisations to fight corruption more
effectively; and
 Engaging citizens and young people in promoting integrity more actively.
BTI works closely with other relevant stakeholders, including the Anti-Corruption Commission of Bhutan (ACC),
CSOs, the media and other professional research institutes to ensure public acceptance, partnership and
ownership of the findings from the above studies and research. BTI partners with experts from around the world
to develop tools and conduct specific and in-depth assessments, research and studies in key areas. Such studies
and assessments include, but are not limited to, the National Integrity System Assessment (NISA) and the Youth
Integrity Survey.
As part of one of its main engagements, BTI conducted the National Corruption Barometer Survey, the results
of which will be useful to educate and engage citizens in fighting corruption in the country.
The objectives of the study were:
To assess the citizens’ perception of corruption around forms, causes, concentration and level in the
country; and
ii. To establish a reference point for awareness, education and advocacy on corruption.
i.
9
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
2. STUDY METHODOLOGY
2.1. Study Design
This study was carried out using a mixed method whereby quantitative information was collected through the
administration of a structured questionnaire while qualitative information was obtained through open-ended
interviews and literature reviews. Both quantitative and qualitative information were collected simultaneously,
analysed separately and triangulated.
2.2. Target Population and Study Sample
Samples were drawn from every section of the Bhutanese society. They consisted of civil servants,
parliamentarians, business people, private employees, corporate employees, armed force personnel, farmers,
housewives, students, local government employees, monastic bodies and the employees of non-governmental
organisations (NGOs). Target population selection was based on Corruption Perception Survey 2007 carried out
by the ACC, , Royal Government of Bhutan (Anti-Corruption Commission, 2008).
2.3. Sampling Procedures
A stratified two-stage cluster sampling approach of probability sampling was adopted. In the first stage, using
probability proportion to size with replacement (PPSWR), primary sampling units (PSUs) were selected from
respective urban and rural master sampling frames provided by the National Statistics Bureau (NSB). In the
second stage, samples were drawn from the selected PSUs using simple random sampling without replacement
(SRSWOR).
2.3.1. Sample Size Determination
Assuming 95% confidence level, 0.5 standard deviation, and a margin of error (confidence interval) of +/-5%,
sample size was determined as by using the formula below as proposed by Smith (2013):
Where:
n = Sample size;
Z = Statistics for a level of confidence (95%);
P = Percentage picking a choice expressed as decimal; and
D = Precision or confidence interval (1-0.95=0.05)
The current population of Bhutan stands at 773,684. Since n/N <0.05, finite population correction (FPC) was
not used (Wayne W. Daniel, 2013). Without using FPC:
n = 385 (representative at national level)
To be representative at regional level, the sample size was multiplied by 3 since the country is divided into 3
regions of the west, the centre, and the east: 3*385 = 1,155
2.3.2. Sample Allocation
A total sample size of 1,200, that is, 600 each from rural and urban areas, was selected from 48 Primary
Sampling Units (PSUs) (24 PSUs each from rural and urban areas).
2.4. Data Collection Method
An open source mobile data collection solution was deployed and the data were collected through the use of
smart phones/tablets. This method was used due to its following comaparative advantage over the conventional
paper-based data collection method:
10
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
Ease of managing large surveys across regions with a large number of surveyors:
o It can be deployed remotely and survey works can be tracked in real time
o The questionnaire can be changed, if necessary, even while surveyors are in the field
- Enhanced data quality:
o Logical questions can be set, thereby making non-applicable questions hidden from surveyors
o Validation checks for answers entered can be set. It can prompt enumerators if answers do not
match ‘pre-filled’ data
o Data can be checked on a real time basis, allowing for prompt review of data quality and making
auditing and respondent tracking procedures more nimble.
- Cost and time effective:
o Involves service provider costs only
o Enables real time access to data to monitor quality and progress
o Environmentally-friendly as there is no need to print the questionnaire
- Ease of collecting new data types (location, media, etc.):
o A single device with multimedia tools such as GPS, and audio and video applications
o Non-text data can be integrated with text data in real time
o Real time access to location, photos, etc.
The enumerators collected the data offline and stored it on the mobile device. The supervisors examined the data
and transferred them to their laptops and then uploaded to the centralised server. A data manager then monitored
and managed the dataset.
-
2.5. Weighting
T2he NCBS sample is not self-weighted. Sample weights were, therefore, computed and used in the tabulation
of the survey data. Each observation was multiplied by its appropriate weight.The raw weights computed for the
survey data took account of the following elements:
a. The probability of a particular enumeration area (EA) in the sampling frame being selected into the
sample EA;
b. The difference between the EA size shown in the sampling frame and its size found during the listing
operation;
c. The probability of a particular sample being selected into the sample from all the population found in the
selected EA; and
d. The level of non-response experienced in the survey.
2.6. Data Tabulation and Analysis
Data were cleaned and verified with the help of supervisors before performing data tabulation and analysis. SPSS
version 22 was used to tabulate and analyse the data. Basic statistical analysis techniques such as frequency
and percentage analysis and cross tabulation were used to summarise the quantitative information.
Forms of corruption, its causes, concentration and level were assessed at two levels:
- Calculating the mean score of a 3-point response scale (3-strongly agree; 2-partly agree; and 1-disagree),
and
- Calculating the percentage of each response item.
11
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
3. FINDINGS
3.1. Coverage of the Study
As shown in Figure 1, 61% of the respondents were drawn from rural areas and 39% from urban areas. Of the
1,200 respondents, 63% were from the western region, 20% from the eastern, and 17% from the central region
of the country.
Central, 17%
Urban, 39%
Eastern, 20%
Rural, 61%
Figure 1: Respondents by rural and urban
Western, 63%
Figure 2: Respondents by region
3.2. Demographic Characteristics
3.2.1. Gender
As shown in Figure 3, the proportion of female respondents (59%) was notably higher than that of males (41%).
Male, 41%
Female, 59%
Figure 3: Respondents by sex
12
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
3.2.2. Age
The age of the respondents ranged from 18 to 60 years and above. Respondents from the age group 18-25 years
(youth) made up 15.95% of the overall respondents the age group 26-59 years (adults) accounted for 78.11%,
and the remaining 5.92% were above 60 years of age (senior citizens) (Figure 4).
78.1
80.0
70.0
60.0
%
50.0
40.0
30.0
16.0
20.0
5.9
10.0
0.0
18-25
26-59
Age group
60+
Figure 4: Respondents by age group
3.2.3. Educational Background
As shown in Figure 5, 2.1% of the respondents had postgraduate education. One-fourth of the respondents
had no formal education since the majority of the respondents were from rural areas. Those with middle and
higher secondary education made up the bulk of the respondents, together accounting for 35.5% of the total
respondents.
Post-graduate
2.1%
Diploma/certificate
2.2%
6.8%
Bachelor's degree
7.2%
Lower secondary
9.7%
Non-formal education
10.7%
Primary school
Middle secondary
16.1%
Higher secondary
16.4%
28.7%
No formal education
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
%
20.0
25.0
30.0
Figure 5: Respondents by qualification
13
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
3.2.4. Marital Status
To a large extent, there was a corresponding relationship between marital status and the age category. For
instance, 73.8% of the married respondents corresponded to the 78.1% of the respondents who fell within the
age group of 26-59 years (Figure 6). Likewise, respondents from the age group 18-25 years who made up 16.0%
of the total corresponded to 19.9% of the unmarried respondents.
80.0
73.8%
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
19.9%
20.0
4.3%
10.0
0.0
Married
Never married
Divorced
1.4%
Widowed
0.7%
Living together
Figure 6: Respondents by marital status
3.2.5. Occupational background
Almost half of the overall respondents were either farmers and/or housekeepers, followed by businessmen,
private employees and students (Figure 7). The percentages in fractions from other occupational groups like
parliamentarians, NGO employees, local government employees and others were significantly representative of
their groups given that the population size of these groups were relatively smaller.
Parliamentarian
.2%
NGO employee
.3%
Local government employee
.6%
Monk/Nun/Gomchen
1.7%
Armed force personnel
1.8%
2.7%
Corporate employee
6.5%
Civil servant
Student
7.7%
Private employee
8.1%
24.0%
Business
46.6%
Farmer/house wife
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
Figure 7: Respondents by occupation
14
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
3.3. Forms of Corruption
As reflected in Table 1, favouritism and nepotism in recruitment, and promotion and transfer were the most
prevalent forms of corruption in the country. The second and third most prevalent forms of corruption were
misuse of public funds and facilities. Delaying decisions deliberately with corrupt motives was also perceived as
significantly (66.8%) prevalent in the country. The highest percentage of “declined” was recorded for “taking and
giving bribes” (2.7%) and “misuse of public assets” (2.9%).
Table 1: Views on the forms of corruption prevalent in the country
What are the forms of corruption prevalent in our country?
Strongly
agree%
Partly
agree%
Disagree%
Don’t
know%
Declined%
Nepotism, favouritism (recruitment,
promotion, transfer, etc.)
28.0
52.4
9.1
9.8
0.7
Misuse of public funds
20.5
53.3
12.7
12.3
1.2
Misuse of public facilities
17.9
50.8
15.8
13.2
2.4
Taking and giving bribes
17.7
49.3
17.8
12.5
2.7
Misuse of public assets
15.6
47.5
18.2
15.8
2.9
Delaying decision/action deliberately
with corrupt motives
15.3
51.5
14.8
16.9
1.6
Misuse of human resources
15.0
53.2
14.2
15.7
1.9
Electoral fraud
14.0
37.8
18.2
29.0
1.0
Prosecution of corruption cases
13.1
43.6
19.3
23.2
0.8
Fronting involving Bhutanese to nonBhutanese
12.8
40.9
16.6
27.9
1.8
Fronting involving Bhutanese to
Bhutanese
12.7
44.5
16.9
23.6
2.3
Collusion between public and private
in procurement
10.9
44.0
16.5
26.9
1.7
Collusion between private and private
in procurement
9.5
43.1
14.2
32.0
1.2
Privatisation of public institutions for
private gains
9.3
46.2
18.4
23.9
2.3
Forms of corruption
As shown in Table 2, a comparatively higher proportion of urban citizens reported the prevalence of corruption of
almost all forms compared with the rural citizens.
Table 2: Views on the forms of corruption by area
Forms of corruption Rural%
Urban%
Total%
Nepotism, favouritism
24.6
33.4
28.0
Misuse of public funds
15.6
28.1
20.5
Misuse of public facilities
14.6
23.1
17.9
Taking and giving bribes
13.8
23.9
17.7
Misuse of public assets
12.4
20.5
15.6
Delaying decision/action deliberately for corrupt motives
12.3
19.9
15.3
Misuse of human resources
12.2
19.5
15.0
Electoral fraud
12.2
16.9
14.0
15
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
Prosecution of corruption cases
10.7
16.9
13.1
Fronting involving Bhutanese to non-Bhutanese
13.2
12.0
12.8
Fronting involving Bhutanese to Bhutanese
10.9
15.5
12.7
Collusion between public and private in procurement
9.6
13.0
10.9
Collusion between private and private in procurement
7.7
12.4
9.5
Privatisation of public institutions for private gains
8.0
11.3
9.3
As depicted in Table 3, as compared to females respondents, males respondents reported higher occurrences
for nepotism and favouritism, prosecution of corruption cases as well as fronting involving Bhutanese to nonBhutanese (Table 3).
Table 3: Views on the forms of corruption by sex
Forms of corruption Female%
Male%
Total%
Nepotism, favouritism
26.0
30.9
28.0
Misuse of public funds
17.8
24.2
20.5
Misuse of public facilities
16.3
20.1
17.9
Taking and giving bribes
15.9
20.3
17.7
Misuse of public assets
14.3
17.4
15.6
Delaying decision/action deliberately for corrupt motives
14.1
16.9
15.3
Misuse of human resources
13.8
16.8
15.0
Electoral fraud
14.1
14.0
14.0
Prosecution of corruption cases
12.7
13.6
13.1
Fronting involving Bhutanese to non-Bhutanese
11.7
14.3
12.8
Fronting involving Bhutanese to Bhutanese
11.9
13.8
12.7
Collusion between public and private in procurement
9.4
13.0
10.9
Collusion between private and private in procurement
8.4
11.1
9.5
Privatisation of public institutions for private gains
8.2
10.9
9.3
As shown in Table 4, respondents who are below the age of 25 years were more adversely affected by the
prevalence of corruption and therefore they were more concerned about it.
Table 4: Views on the forms of corruption by age group
Forms of corruption Below 25
years%
26-40
years%
41 years and
above%
Total%
Nepotism, favouritism
32.3
28.1
25.3
28.0
Misuse of public funds
28.5
19.1
17.4
20.5
Misuse of public facilities
25.7
15.9
15.6
17.9
Taking and giving bribes
25.6
15.9
15.2
17.7
Misuse of public assets
22.8
13.8
13.4
15.6
Delaying decision/action deliberately for corrupt motives
20.0
14.7
13.1
15.3
Misuse of human resources
17.6
15.0
13.4
15.0
Electoral fraud
19.6
13.3
11.6
14.0
Prosecution of corruption cases
17.1
12.8
11.1
13.1
Fronting involving Bhutanese to non-Bhutanese
13.8
11.7
13.6
12.8
Fronting involving Bhutanese to Bhutanese
13.3
12.0
13.3
12.7
16
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
Collusion between public and private in procurement
14.5
9.9
10.0
10.9
Collusion between private and private in procurement
11.0
9.8
8.2
9.5
Privatisation of public institutions for private gains
11.0
8.7
9.0
9.3
Citizens with formal education reported a much higher prevalence of corruption of all forms compared with
citizens with no formal education (Table 5). This may be attributed to their knowledge and understanding of their
rights and government systems.
Table 5: Views on the forms of corruption by educational status
Forms of corruption Have formal
education%
No formal
education%
Total%
Nepotism, favouritism
32.6
16.9
28.0
Misuse of public funds
25.3
8.5
20.5
Misuse of public facilities
22.0
7.6
17.9
Taking and giving bribes
22.4
6.2
17.7
Misuse of public assets
19.4
6.0
15.6
Delaying decision/action deliberately for corrupt motives
19.4
4.9
15.3
Misuse of human resources
19.4
4.1
15.0
Electoral fraud
17.3
6.0
14.0
Prosecution of corruption cases
17.0
3.5
13.1
Fronting involving Bhutanese to non-Bhutanese
15.3
6.6
12.8
Fronting involving Bhutanese to Bhutanese
15.9
4.6
12.7
Collusion between public and private in procurement
13.7
4.0
10.9
Collusion between private and private in procurement
12.7
1.5
9.5
Privatisation of public institutions for private gains
11.5
3.8
9.3
Amongst the occupational groups, civil servants reported a comparatively higher prevalence of forms of corruption
such as nepotism/favouritism, misuse of public finds, and misuse of public assets (Table 6). Private employees
reported that the misuse of public facilities as the most prevalent form of corruption in the country.
Table 6: Views on the forms of corruption by region
Forms of corruption Central%
Eastern%
Western%
Total%
Nepotism, favouritism
8.0
42.2
29.1
28.0
Misuse of public funds
7.9
27.4
21.7
20.5
Misuse of public facilities
7.1
24.7
18.7
17.9
Taking and giving bribes
6.0
29.8
17.1
17.7
Misuse of public assets
5.3
24.8
15.4
15.6
Delaying decision/action deliberately for corrupt motives
5.6
26.3
14.4
15.3
Misuse of human resources
6.5
25.4
14.0
15.0
Electoral fraud
2.2
27.4
13.0
14.0
Prosecution of corruption cases
3.2
22.1
13.0
13.1
Fronting involving Bhutanese to non-Bhutanese
3.4
19.4
13.3
12.8
Fronting involving Bhutanese to Bhutanese
3.8
20.1
12.8
12.7
Collusion between public and private in procurement
5.2
18.6
10.0
10.9
Collusion between private and private in procurement
1.3
15.2
9.9
9.5
Privatisation of public institutions for private gains
6.1
20.2
6.7
9.3
17
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
Perceived as the major forms of corruption in the country Further more, i perceive with to be highly prevalent as
compared to other forms of corruption like misuse of public funds, electoral fraud, misuse of human resources etc
Table 7: Views on the forms of corruption by occupation
Forms of corruption
Others
Farmer/
Business
%
House wife%
%
Civil
servant%
Private
employee%
Student
%
Total
%
Nepotism, favouritism
38.9
21.6
25.6
43.8
35.1
43.8
28.0
Misuse of public funds
19.8
13.4
24.4
33.0
32.2
28.7
20.5
Misuse of public facilities
22.9
11.7
16.8
28.4
31.0
30.9
17.9
Taking and giving bribes
23.0
13.2
20.0
15.6
25.3
26.4
17.7
Misuse of public assets
17.8
10.7
18.2
25.7
20.8
20.6
15.6
Delaying decision/action
deliberately for corrupt
motives
17.7
10.5
14.8
25.2
22.2
27.8
15.3
Misuse of human
resources
18.9
10.6
14.6
24.0
25.8
20.4
15.0
Electoral fraud
16.1
11.3
14.4
18.3
13.3
24.5
14.0
Prosecution of corruption
cases
15.1
9.1
14.7
19.1
19.5
19.1
13.1
Fronting involving
Bhutanese to nonBhutanese
13.4
12.8
10.0
14.0
16.8
15.3
12.8
Fronting involving
Bhutanese to Bhutanese
14.3
10.5
12.1
18.0
16.2
17.7
12.7
Collusion between
public and private in
procurement
10.9
8.5
9.0
15.3
21.1
17.0
10.9
Collusion between
private and private in
procurement
12.0
7.4
8.2
9.1
20.2
13.2
9.5
Privatisation of public
institutions for private
gains
11.3
8.0
7.8
9.6
14.9
13.8
9.3
Statistics reveal that bribery is not as prevalent in the country as other forms of corruption, particularly nepotism
and favouritism. To every question on bribery, an average of about 31% of the citizens reported that they had
not paid a bribe while accessing certain essential government services (Table 8). Only 1.46% of the respondents
reported having bribed government officials. On an aggregate level, 10.2% of the citizens reported having paid
a bribe in the past 12 months. This means corruption has directly impacted 10 in every 100 citizens in the past
year. Interestingly, 2.6% of the respondents reported of haing bribed a government official to get the documents
they needed.
18
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
Table 8: Experiences of accessing certain essential government services
A. In the past 12 months have you had
contact with a public school?
B. In the past 12 months have you had
contact with a public clinic or hospital?
C. In the past 12 months have you tried
to get an identity document like a birth
certificate, driver’s license, passport
or voter’s card, or a permit, from the
government?
And how often, if ever, did you have to pay a bribe, give a gift,
or do a favour for a teacher or school official in order to get the
services you needed from the schools?
Paid a bribe%
Never paid a bribe%
Don’t know%
1.6
48.4
0.4
And how often, if ever, did you have to pay a bribe, give a gift, or
do a favour for a health worker or clinic or hospital staff in order to
get the medical care you needed?
Paid a bribe%
Never paid a bribe%
Don’t know%
2.2
68.3
0.6
And how often, if ever, did you have to pay a bribe, give a gift, or
do a favour for a government official in order to get the document
you needed? Paid a bribe%
Never paid a bribe%
Don’t know%
2.6
32.8
0.1
And how often, if ever, did you have to pay a bribe, give a gift, or
do a favour for a government official in order to get the services
D. In the past 12 months have you tried
to get water, sanitation or electric services you needed?
from the government? Paid a bribe%
Never paid a bribe%
Don’t know%
1.4
E. In the past 12 months have you had
contact with the police?
F. In the past 12 months have you had
contact with the courts?
G. In the past 12 months have you had
contact with the G2C Services? 19
23.8
0.5
And how often, if ever, did you have to pay a bribe, give a gift,
or do a favour for a police officer in order to get the assistance
you needed, or to avoid a problem like passing a checkpoint or
avoiding a fine or arrest? Paid a bribe%
Never paid a bribe%
Don’t know %
1.2
14.6
0.1
And how often, if ever, did you have to pay a bribe, give a gift, or do
a favour for a judge or court official in order to get the assistance
you needed from the courts? Paid a bribe%
Never paid a bribe%
Don’t know%
0.5
8.2
0
And how often, if ever, did you have to pay a bribe, give a gift, or do
a favour for a judge or court official in order to get the assistance
you needed from the G2C Services?
Paid a bribe%
Never paid a bribe%
Don’t know%
0.7
21.6
0.5
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
About 8% of the respondents reported of having paid bribe to the police, followed by those (7.2%) who bribed
government officials to obtain official documents and forms like birth certificate, driving license, passport or
voter’s card, and certain permits (Figure 8). About 7% of the respondents reported having paid a bribe or done a
favour for a judge or court officials in order to get the assistance they needed from the courts.
7.70
8.00
7.20
6.80
7.00
5.50
6.00
%
5.00
3.30
4.00
3.10
3.00
2.80
2.00
1.00
0.00
Police
Birth
certificate,
driver's
license,
passport or
voter's card or
a permit from
government
Courts
Water,
sanitation or
electric
services from
government
Public school
Public hospital
G2C
Figure 8: Bribery rate by essential government services
The proportion of citizens who had paid a bribe, gave a gift, or did a favor in the past 12 months was significantly
higher in the urban areas (14.3%) than in rural areas (6.16%) Figure 9). This corroborates the preceding finding
that corruption is more prevalent in the urban areas. The highest rate of incidences of bribery was reported in the
eastern region (13.1%), followed by the western region (10.3%) (Figure 10). No case of bribery was reported in
the central region. Males (10.5%) offered bribes more than females (8.13%) (Figure 11).
Central, 0%
Rural,
6.16%
Western,
10.34%
Eastern,
13.07%
Urban,
14.34%
Figure 9: Bribery by area
20
Figure 10: Bribery by region
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
No formal
education, 5.53%
Female,
8.13%
Male,
10.47%
Has formal
education, 10.54%
Figure 11: Bribery by sex
Figure 12: Bribery by formal education
Only 2.3% of the respondents reported that the bribery incidents they had experienced had been reported to a
government official or someone in a position of authority (Table 9). Some of the common reasons for not reporting
bribery incidents among the respondents included authorities not taking action against the government officials
involved bribery, and worse, they suffered retaliation or other negative consequences as a result of reporting
bribery incidents (Table 10).
Table 9: Reporting bribery incidents
If you ever paid a bribe for any of the services discussed above, did you report any of the incidents
you mentioned to a government official or someone in authority?
%
No
71.9
Not Applicable
4.5
Yes
2.3
Don’t know
1.2
Table 10: Action taken against or retaliation suffered
Which of the following happened in the most recent time that you reported a bribery incident?
Yes,
happened%
No, didn’t
happen%
Not applicable
(no incidents
reported)%
Don’t
know%
Authorities took action against the
government officials involved.
1.3
0.4
0.3
0.3
You suffered retaliation or other negative
consequences as a result of reporting the
incident.
0.8
0.9
0.3
0.3
21
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
3.4 Causes of Corruption
As indicated in Table 11, discriminatory and non-uniform application of laws and rules stood out as the biggest
cause of corruption in the country. Other noticeable factors leading to corruption were lengthy procedures, weak
and ineffective media and a strong protective social net of the accused. Weak leadership, lack of information and
transparency on rules and procedures, and poor or lack of robust accountability mechanism in place were found
to be playing a significant role in increasing corruption in the country.
Table 11: Views on the causes of corruption prevalent in the country
What are the causes of corruption prevalent in our country?
Causes of corruption
Strongly Partly Disagree
agree% agree%
%
Don’t Declined
know%
%
Wants (greedy, never enough)
45.4
43.2
6.8
3.9
0.7
Lack of information and transparency on rules & procedures
26.3
51.5
13.1
8.3
0.8
Needs (sheer necessity, basic minimum not met)
25.7
50.4
18.0
5.6
0.3
Weak leaderships at all levels
24.6
45.2
16.2
13.4
0.6
Inaction of cases reported
24.0
47.1
14.8
13.2
0.8
Discriminatory & non-uniform application of laws and
rules
22.1
51.2
14.9
10.5
1.4
Unfair business competition and practices
22.0
51.4
14.5
11.8
0.2
Low moral values
20.0
37.4
22.6
19.4
0.6
Poor or no proper accountability mechanism
18.0
52.0
11.8
18.0
0.3
Too many rules to follow
17.7
39.4
26.3
16.5
0.1
Lengthy procedures
17.6
47.6
16.8
17.7
0.4
Unclear rules with loopholes for manipulation
15.8
49.0
16.0
18.6
0.6
Weak and ineffective media
14.8
40.5
24.1
19.9
0.7
Strong protective social net of the accused
14.7
49.9
16.5
17.7
1.2
Inefficient service delivery
13.7
49.3
15.3
21.2
0.6
Non-enforcement of rules and procedures
12.6
51.2
17.9
17.8
0.4
Social demands and obligations
12.5
50.2
15.8
21.0
0.6
Even though corruption affects everyone, and “every person shall have the duty to uphold justice and to act
against corruption” according to the Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan (RGOB, 2008), not many seem to
carry out this duty. The most frequent reason stated for not reporting corruption incidents was that the citizens
believe that nothing would be done or that reporting would not make any difference. More than a quarter of the
population (25.32%) thought that corruption was normal, that everyone indulged in it and there was nothing
wrong in indulging in it (Table 12). This findings indicate the existence of pervasive corruption in the country and
a high level of acceptance of corruption as a norm in the society. Some 13.43% of the population was afraid that
combating corruption would be an uphill task as doing so would require taking on a powerful nexus of judges,
bureaucrats, politicians, and businessmen. In a close-knit society, where interdependence is quite a norm, there
would not be many who would risk being excluded from this circle of interdependence. However, anti-corruption
initiatives like advocacy could bring some positive changes as a good proportion of the population still does not
know how to report corruption.
22
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
Table 12: Reasons for not reporting corruption incidents
Some people say that many incidents of corruption are never reported. Based on your experience,
what do you think is the main reason why many people do not report corruption?
Incidents of corruption are never reported
%
Nothing will be done/It wouldn’t make a difference
28.30
Corruption is normal/Everyone does it/everyone is involved
25.32
People don’t know how to report it
19.56
People are afraid of the consequences
13.43
Most people do report incidents of corruption
5.68
The officials to whom they would report are also corrupt/officials are involved in corruption
3.15
People don’t know where to report it
3.00
It’s government’s money, not the people’s, so it’s not our problem
1.58
3.5 Concentration of Corruption
The respondents thought that across different sectors, corruption was highly concentrated at the top decision
making level as depicted in Table 13. Corruption was thought to be comparatively low at the lower supervisory or
support and operational level.
Table 13: Views on the concentration of corruption in the country
In your opinion, where is corruption most concentrated?:
Level
Strongly Partly
agree% agree%
Disagree
%
Don’t
know%
Declined
%
Government
More at the top decision making level
28.1
39.8
11.0
19.9
1.1
More at the middle administrative and managerial level
16.5
54.0
10.1
18.2
1.2
More at the lower supervisory/support and operational
level
13.6
38.4
25.6
20.9
1.5
Corporations
More at the top decision making level
25.0
43.6
9.4
21.1
1.0
More at the middle administrative and managerial level
14.2
54.3
9.6
20.9
1.0
More at the lower supervisory/support and operational
level
10.3
40.3
24.0
23.8
1.5
More at the top decision making level
20.0
39.8
9.4
30.1
0.8
More at the middle administrative and managerial level
12.3
46.0
11.2
29.9
.5
More at the lower supervisory/support and operational
level
9.9
32.1
25.2
31.4
1.3
Autonomous Agencies
Local Government
More at the top decision making level
27.3
45.2
12.5
14.1
0.9
More at the middle administrative and managerial level
14.6
55.4
13.3
15.5
1.2
More at the lower supervisory/support and operational
level
12.5
40.7
29.0
16.6
1.1
NGOs (or CSOs?)
More at the top decision making level
17.3
37.5
10.8
33.2
1.3
More at the middle administrative and managerial level
More at the lower supervisory/support and operational
level
10.6
43.2
10.3
35.0
1.0
9.6
27.8
26.6
34.6
1.4
23
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
Private Sector
More at the top decision making level
30.8
42.7
7.5
18.8
0.3
More at the middle administrative and managerial level
18.6
52.0
9.6
19.4
0.5
More at the lower supervisory/support and operational
level
17.4
36.8
24.2
20.8
0.8
Constitutional Bodies
More at the top decision making level
18.3
37.0
13.5
30.4
0.8
More at the middle administrative and managerial level
9.9
44.4
13.5
31.4
1.0
More at the lower supervisory/support and operational
level
8.6
30.0
28.9
31.4
1.2
3.6. Corruption in Public Service Delivery
On aggregation, the Ministry of Education (MoE) scored the highest, followed by the Ministry of Health (MoH)
and the armed forces in terms of quality of service delivery (Table 14). Among the central ministries, the Ministry
of Labour and Human Resources (MoLHR) was deemed the least user-friendly. Joining the league of the least
user-friendly organisations were the judiciary and the private sector, whose service delivery systems were
overwhelmingly rated as ”Very dissatisfied”. Only 8.2% of citizens admitted that they were “Very satisfied” with
the quality of service delivery of the judiciary.
Table 14: Satisfaction with the quality of service delivery
How satisfied are you with the quality of service delivery of the following sectors/organisations?
Very
satisfied %
Satisfied
%
Neutral
%
Dissatisfied
%
Very
dissatisfied %
Armed forces
19.8
53.1
24.2
2.3
0.6
MoH: Ministry of Health
19.6
57.2
18.3
4.1
0.8
MoE: Ministry of Education
18.8
60.8
15.2
4.5
0.6
MoA: Ministry of Agriculture
17.3
57.3
20.8
4.2
0.4
Monastic body
15.0
56.7
25.9
1.6
0.7
MoF: Ministry of Finance
10.5
57.0
28.3
3.7
0.5
MoEA: Ministry of Economic Affairs
9.9
56.0
30.0
3.6
0.5
MoHCA: Ministry of Home and Cultural Affairs
9.9
54.9
30.5
3.9
0.8
MoIC: Ministry of Information and
Communications
9.5
53.9
32.4
3.5
0.7
MoFA: Ministry of Foreign Affairs
9.0
52.5
34.2
3.8
0.5
City Corporation (which city corporation?
Thimphu?)
8.6
51.1
35.1
4.6
0.7
MoLHR: Ministry of Labour and Human
Resources
8.4
52.3
28.8
7.9
2.6
MoWHS: Ministry of Works and Human
Settlement
8.4
49.9
34.1
5.8
1.8
Judiciary
8.2
51.1
37.0
3.0
0.8
Others
8.1
48.0
41.9
1.7
0.2
Financial institutions
7.8
54.8
33.4
3.4
0.6
Corporations
7.4
54.3
34.8
2.9
0.6
Autonomous agencies
7.1
47.9
42.5
2.1
0.5
Private sector
5.5
46.9
42.5
4.2
0.9
24
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
Although the MoH, MoE and MoAF were rated high on the quality of service delivery ratings, their services were
far from being efficient and were not without problems (Table 15). A third of the population reported that they
encountered problems while accessing health care services. Likewise, a quarter of the population said that they
faced problems in accessing education services. Agriculture and land transactions were other key government
services to access with which people reported faced problems. The problems related to health service delivery
were mainly related to delays in accessing hospital services, which respondents said were primarily due to the
lack of advanced technologies in hospitals across the country. Compounding the problem was the preferential
treatment medical staffs gave to VIPs and their friends and relatives.
Table 15: Problems encountered while accessing public services
Have you faced any problem while accessing the following services?
Yes % No %
Don’t
know %
Not
availed %
Declined
%
Health services
35.2
60.5
2.2
1.8
0.3
Education services
24.6
68.1
3.7
2.8
0.8
Agriculture services
24.4
59.2
3.9
11.9
0.5
Land transaction services
23.1
58.6
4.7
13.3
0.3
Banking services
18.7
72.3
5.0
3.6
0.4
Immigration and census services
17.0
62.3
7.0
13.2
0.4
Local government services
15.5
69.3
5.9
9.1
0.2
Corporate services (BPC, Bhutan Telecom, etc.)
15.4
69.8
8.1
6.5
0.2
Licensing services
15.0
61.7
7.2
15.8
0.3
Travel document services
13.2
58.0
6.7
21.6
0.4
Police services
13.2
69.4
6.8
10.4
0.2
Construction services
12.2
55.8
11.0
20.3
0.7
Government clearance services
11.4
67.0
6.1
15.0
0.5
City/municipal services/Thromde
11.4
59.4
12.8
15.7
0.7
Private services
10.0
65.9
10.4
13.4
0.3
Labour permits and inspection services
9.1
53.6
9.0
27.8
0.6
Administrative/management services
8.9
65.1
10.8
14.8
0.5
Finance services (payment, releases, etc.)
8.8
62.0
9.8
19.0
0.5
Auditing services
7.0
57.5
9.8
24.9
0.8
Procurement services
6.6
61.9
12.4
18.2
0.9
Judiciary services
5.6
63.0
10.8
19.8
0.8
Religious and monastic services
5.5
80.8
8.4
4.9
0.3
NGO (CSO?) services
2.7
58.5
14.0
24.5
0.3
Services not mentioned
2.2
71.3
11.7
13.5
1.3
Others
0.9
84.0
8.8
4.1
2.2
One of the common problems faced by the citizens on a daily basis while accessing public services was
discrimination on the basis of social status. About 20% of the population admitted that such kind of discrimination
was the key problem in accessing the public services and that the trend was on the rise (Table 16). Preferential
treatment given to influential people was affecting ordinary citizens’ access to basic services.
25
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
Table 16: Common problems encountered
If so, what are the problems you encountered?
%
Discrimination based on wealth, gender, caste, etc.
20.01
Lack of facility
19.62
Poor service delivery
18.42
System-related problem
15.27
Personnel-related problems
13.05
Poor infrastructure-related problems
10.33
TA/DA and others
2.82
Others
0.49
About 63% of the population beleived that judges were involved in corruption (Figure 13). More than half of the
population (63.2%) reported that some judges were corrupt while 31.1% of the respondents reported that most
judges were corrupt (Table 17). Nevertheless, a good proportion of the population holds the view that not all the
judges were corrupt although not many were of the view that none of them was corrupt. When it came to judges,
most respondent had an opinion to share.
Mean score (1 - 3)
1.40
1.20
1.35
1.27
1.16 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.13 1.13 1.12 1.12 1.11
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
Figure 13: Mean score of individuals involved in corruption
26
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
Table 17: Views on individuals involved in corruption
How many of the following people do you think are involved in corruption, or haven’t you heard
enough about them to say?
Yes %
No%
Don’t know/
Haven’t heard%
73.2
13.1
13.8
46
32.1
21.8
Religious leaders
38.2
41.8
20.0
Judges and Magistrates
95.7
2.7
1.7
The Prime Minister and Ministers in his Cabinet
56
21.8
22.2
Journalists and media personnel
41
32.4
26.6
Government officials
74.9
11.5
13.7
Tax officials, like Ministry of Finance officials or Local Government
tax collectors
59.4
21.0
19.6
Traditional leaders
39.1
35.8
24.9
Teachers and education personnel in schools, colleges etc.
37.5
50.0
12.6
Police
71.8
16.6
11.7
61
18.5
20.5
70.7
15.8
13.6
63
24.2
12.8
Involved in corruption
Business executives
Charity or aid workers
Members of Parliament
Local government officials
Doctors, nurses and health service personnel
3.7 Important Problems Facing the Country
A quarter of the population was oblivious to the most important problems facing the country. About 16% of the
respondents identified food and agriculture as the most important areas that needed urgent policy intervention
(Table 18). The predominance of food and agriculture is quite natural as the majority of the respondents were from
the rural background and belonged to the farming community. One main concern of the respondents related to
food and agriculture was wild animals posing a serious threat to their crops. Other problems included inadequate
distribution of agriculture seeds, lack of functional irrigation channels and the poor quality of farm roads. With
the growing population and resulting activities like logging (legal or otherwise) overlapping with the established
wildlife territories, human-wildlife conflict is an important problem facing the vast rural population.
Table 18: The most important problem(s) facing the country
In your opinion, what are the most important problems facing this
country that government should address?
%
Don’t know
25.24
Food/Agriculture
15.59
Infrastructure
15.31
Health
14.04
Government services
8.56
Other responses
8.43
Economic
7.75
Governance
5.07
Infrastructure development was identified by 15.31% of the population as the most important problem, followed by
health (14.04%). Uneven distribution of infrastructure development throughout the country at the regional, district
or block level was underlined as a concern. Another serious problem that respondents aspired the government
to look into was the quality of infrastructure projects, whether it was road construction, school upgrading or
27
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
hospital construction. Infrastructure facilities in schools/colleges and hospitals, including telecommunications,
were reported to be in a sorry state.
The majority of respondents’ dissatisfaction with the health sector arose from medical mishaps leading to death,
lack of advanced medical technologies in hospitals, unavailability of ambulances during emergencies, and the
shortage of experienced and qualified health workers in hospitals. Some pointed out that they have to walk long
distances to reach the nearest Basic Health Unit (BHU).
One of the most frequent problems pointed out in the health sector was the preferential treatment given to
patients based on their social status and connections. It was Respondents felt that the government needs to
understand the implications of preferential treatment and address it accordingly for the good of everyone.
For close to half of the respondents (46.5%), unemployment was the most important problem facing the country.
They said that the root cause of unemployment was the quality of education, which they believed was on a
steady decline. Some of the principal factors contributing to the deterioration of the quality of education in Bhutan,
according to them, included changes in school curricula (an attempt to localise the curriculum), MoE’s poor
quality textbooks riddled with errors and mistakes, overemphasis on teacher quantity over teacher quality, and
the adaptation and imposition of western curricula on the Bhutanese children who inherently have an “Eastern”
mindset. The respondents wished the government to overhaul the whole formal and vocational education system
in the country so that the system would produce employable graduates for the labour market; the existing formal
and vocational education system, according to the respondents, was not able to produce employable graduates.
Even though there had been a lot of talk and discussion on making public service delivery system more transparent,
efficient and effective with initiatives such as the government to citizen services (G2C), the respondents opined
that the government has yet to make any significant impact on the ground because the attitude of the public
officials has not kept pace with the development. On the economy, respondents would like the government to
address the country’s increasing trade deficit and rupee crunch.
Other important problems that the respondents would like the government to address are environmental issues
like waste disposal and industrial pollution. Urban respondents thought that the government should monitor
taxi fares, while the priority for respondents living near the borders was security as incidents of robberies and
kidnapping have been increasing of late.
Lastly, access to justice was cited by a sizeable proportion (15.6%) of the population as the most important
problem facing the country. Many respondents were disillusioned with the way in which disputes were settled.
The system of legal recourse was virtually inaccessible for commoners who did not have the patronage of any
influential group.
3.8 Level of Corruption
The general perception among the people, as revealed by the study, is that the corruption level has been steadily
increasing since the introduction of democracy in the country. Around a third (31.5%) of the population stated that
the level of corruption has “increased somewhat” after the introduction of democracy (Table 19).
Table 19: Views on the level of corruption since the introduction of democracy
In your opinion, has the level of corruption in this country increased,
decreased, or remained the same since the introduction of democracy?
28
Level of corruption
%
Increased somewhat
31.5
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
Remained the same
21.4
Decreased somewhat
19.3
Increased a lot
17.8
Don’t know
6.6
Decreased a lot
3.4
Concurrently, 32.5% believed that the level of corruption has increased somewhat over the past year (Table 20).
Table 20: Views on the level of corruption over the past year
In your opinion, over the past year, has the level of corruption in this
country increased, decreased, or remained the same?
Level of corruption
%
Increased somewhat
32.5
Remained the same
19.9
Decreased somewhat
19.1
Increased a lot
18.1
Don’t know
5.8
Decreased a lot
4.6
As is evident from Table 21, about 54% of the urban population and about 49% of that of the rural feel that
corruption has increased over the past year. By gender, 55.3% of males and 47.3% of females share the same
opinion.
Table 21: Level of corruption over the past year
Stayed the
same
Decreased
Area
Increased
Don’t know
Total
Rural
24.9
19.04
48.61
7.45
100
Urban
21.82
21.34
53.66
3.18
100
Gender
Female
24.41
21.5
47.27
6.83
100
Male
22.7
17.71
55.27
4.32
100
Below 25 years
24.53
20.65
50.1
4.72
100
26-40 years
27.49
18.08
45.3
9.14
100
41 years and above
15.78
21.37
60.13
2.71
100
Educated
24.27
17.66
54.42
3.65
100
Uneducated
22.3
25.57
41.03
11.1
100
Central
13.24
13.95
52.47
20.35
100
Eastern
27.71
16.03
51.14
5.12
100
Western
25.32
22.86
49.86
1.95
100
24.75
17.99
55.87
1.39
100
Age
Education status
Region
Occupation
Business
29
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
Civil servant
28.01
17.8
50.13
4.06
100
Farmer/housewife
24.1
19.12
46.97
9.81
100
Others
22.2
31.72
42.14
3.94
100
Private employee
24.11
16.11
56.77
3.01
100
Student
15.34
25.74
57.63
1.29
100
3.9 Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC)
Over half of the population has a fair amount of knowledge about the ACC, including its roles and responsibilities
(Table 22). Some 23.1% has heard the commission’s name but know nothing about its functions. Nearly a quarter
of the population is not aware of the functions of the commission even though they have heard the name.
Table 22: Knowledge of anti-corruption
How much, if anything, do you
know about the Anti-Corruption
Commission?
Never
heard of
it%
Heard the name, but
don’t know anything
about what it does%
A fair
amount
%
A
great
deal%
4.7
23.1
54.7
13.0
Don’t Refused
know%
%
4.0
0.5
Table 23: Perception of Anti-corruption Commission
How well or badly would you say the
ACC is doing in fighting corruption in
this country?
Never heard
of it%
Very
Badly%
Fairly
Badly%
1.1
0.8
2.7
Fairly Very
Well% Well%
72.3
16.6
Haven’t
heard
enough%
6.5
About a fifth of the urban population has rated the performance of ACC as “very well” compared to 15.6% of the
rural population (Table 24). Educated people rated the performance of the ACC relatively better (72% rated fairly
well and 19.3% rated very well) compared to the ratings of the uneducated population (68% rated fairly well and
12.4% rated very well).
Table 24: ACC’s performance rating
Never heard
of it%
Very badly%
Fairly
badly%
Fairly
well%
Very
well%
Don’t
know%
Total%
Rural
1.04
0.88
3.4
71.52
15.54
7.62
100
Urban
1.33
0.78
1.99
70.02
20.11
5.77
100
Female
1.42
0.53
3.67
71.05
15.34
7.99
100
Male
0.8
1.26
1.69
70.74
20.17
5.34
100
Educated
0.93
0.76
2.16
72.03
19.26
4.86
100
Uneducated
1.76
1.06
4.62
67.95
12.38
12.22
100
Below 25 years
0.67
0.56
2.75
72.85
18.48
4.68
100
26-40 years
1.64
1.27
3.43
67.23
15.76
10.67
100
1.48
0.78
2.1
72.34
17.46
5.83
100
Area
Gender
Education status
Age
41 years and
above
30
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
Region
Central
0.22
0
4.22
68.34
7.56
19.67
100
Eastern
2.81
1.94
2.12
70.7
18.08
4.35
100
Western
0.86
0.69
2.73
71.6
19.51
4.61
100
0.5
0.85
1.86
77.79
16.21
2.79
100
0
0.76
3.36
66.03
29.85
0
100
1.4
1.19
3.9
67.01
14.87
11.63
100
Others
2
0.5
3.05
68.72
20.12
5.61
100
Private employee
0
0.14
2.17
77.08
19.33
1.27
100
3.31
0
0
70.78
19.72
6.2
100
Occupation
Business
Civil servant
Farmer/housewife
Student
3.10 Combating Corruption
In the fight against corruption, the study indicated that majority (35.5%) of the respondents thought that there was
no difference between the ruling party and the opposition when it came to “Fighting corruption in the government”
(Table 25). Although the rating for the ruling party was slightly higher as compared to that of the opposition party,
there was no significant difference between the two. Nevertheless, the ruling government fared quite well on all
three performance indicators of fighting corruption, promoting good governance and upholding the rule of law
(Figure 14 and Table 26).
Table 25: Ruling party versus the opposition in fighting corruption
Looking at the ruling and opposition parties in this country, which would you say is better able to
address the following matters, or haven’t you heard enough to give an opinion?
Fighting corruption in government
Ruling
party%
Opposition
party %
Neither of
them%
Haven’t heard
enough%
Both%
23.4
22.3
7.5
11.3
35.5
Mean score (1 - 4)
3.05
3.05
3.04
3.03
3.02
3.02
3.01
3.00
3
2.99
2.98
2.97
Fighting corruption in
government
Promoting good
governance
Upholding respect for
the rule of law
Figure 14: Mean score of current government’s performance
31
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
Table 26: Current government’s performance
How well or badly would you say the current government is handling the following matters, or haven’t
you heard enough about it to say?
Very
Badly%
Fairly
Badly%
Fairly
Well%
Very
Well%
Haven’t heard
enough%
Fighting corruption in government
1.0
6.1
71.8
12.7
8.4
Promoting good governance
1.8
10.2
64.1
15.8
8.0
Upholding respect for the rule of law
2.1
9.4
68.3
13.7
6.6
Almost about a quarter of the population (24.17%) stated that ordinary citizens cannot do anything substantial
to curb corruption (Table 27). However, 17.33% of the population felt that reporting corruption incidents would
help combat corruption in the country whereas 12.50% thought that joining or supporting an organisation fighting
corruption was an effective means of combating corruption. Clearly, the ordinary citizens recognised the need to
fight corruption very well, and the will to combat corruption is apparent although they differ in the choice of the
most effective approaches to combating corruption.
Table 27: Things an ordinary person can do to help combat corruption
What is the most effective thing that an ordinary person like you can do to help combat corruption in
this country? %
Nothing/ordinary people cannot do anything
24.17
Report corruption when you see or experience it
17.33
Join or support an organisation that is fighting corruption
12.50
Vote for clean candidates or parties or parties that promise to fight corruption
11.25
Talk to friends and relatives about the problem
10.00
Refuse to pay bribes
7.92
Speak out about the problem, for example, by calling a radio programme or writing a letter
7.25
Don’t know
5.50
Protest
1.90
Sign a petition demanding a stronger fight against corruption
1.42
Others
0.75
32
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
Pertaining to the people’s role in combating corruption, it was encouraging to find that the proportion of citizens
that agreed that they would report a corruption case even if they have to spend a day in a court of law to give
evidence was was quiet high, followed by the group that agreed that they would feel personally obliged to report
an act of corruption if they witnessed one (Figure 15).
3.65
3.6
mean score (1 - 5)
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.55
3.5
3.5
3.45
3.4
3.35
Ordinary people can
make a difference in
the fight against
corruption
In our society it is
generally acceptable
for people to report a
case of corruption
they have witnessed
I would feel
personally obliged to
report it if I witnessed
an act of corruption
I would report a case
of corruption even if I
would have to spend
a day in court to give
evidence
Figure 15: Mean score of ordinary citizens’ role
Table 28: Ordinary citizens’ role
Please tell me whether you agree or disagree with the following statements: Strongly
disagree %
Disagree
%
Neither agree
nor disagree%
Agree%
A. Ordinary people can make
a difference in the fight against
corruption
6.8
17.3
11.7
44.8
15.2
4.3
B. In our society it is generally
acceptable for people to report
a case of corruption they have
witnessed
5.5
15.8
10.8
49.3
14.1
4.5
C. I would feel personally
obliged to report it if I witnessed
an act of corruption
7.4
10.3
13.6
48.1
17.0
3.6
D. I would report a case of
corruption even if I would have
to spend a day in court to give
evidence
6.0
11.6
16.4
42.9
19.4
3.7
33
Strongly Don’t
agree% know%
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
Sixty two percent of the population reported that they would report a case of corruption even if they would have to
spend a day in court to provide evidence(Table 29). About two third of the urban population compared to 59.4%
of the rural population expressed willingness to report corruption cases.
Table 29: Willingness to report corruption cases even if they would have to spend a day in court to give
evidence
Neither agree
nor disagree%
Disagree%
Area
Agree%
Don’t know%
Total%
Rural
20.31
16.64
59.39
3.66
100
Urban
13.36
15.44
66.08
5.12
100
Female
18.84
16.55
59.59
5.02
100
Male
15.87
15.64
65.39
3.11
100
Educated
17.66
14.79
64.48
3.07
100
Uneducated
17.49
19.6
55.79
7.11
100
Below 25 years
17.14
16.7
63.56
2.61
100
26-40 years
19.18
17.17
57.54
6.11
100
41 years and above
16.11
13.42
65.74
4.73
100
Central
23.38
1.01
71.17
4.44
100
Eastern
25.65
25.25
48.43
0.66
100
Western
13.41
17.46
63.8
5.32
100
Business
12.45
18.34
67.82
1.39
100
Civil servant
16.61
7.43
72.24
3.71
100
Farmer/House wife
23.22
15
56.68
5.09
100
Others
14.83
16.48
65.39
3.29
100
Private employee
12.34
26.75
59.24
1.67
100
8.7
12.49
66.96
11.86
100
Gender
Education status
Age
Region
Occupation
Student
34
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
A little over 57% of the rural population agreed or strongly agreed that ordinary citizens can make a difference in
the fight against corruption. The urban population was more optimistic about the difference the ordinary citizens
can make in the fight against corruption. Likewise, a higher proportion of males over females, educated people
over the uneducated and young people over the old were more confident that the ordinary citizens can make a
difference in the fight against corruption (Table 30).
Table 30: Power of ordinary citizens
Ordinary people can make a difference in the fight against corruption
Strongly disagree/
disagree%
Area
Neither agree
nor disagree%
Strongly agree/
agree%
Don’t
know%
Total%
Rural
25.79
10.33
57.89
6
100
Urban
22.76
10.95
62.44
3.86
100
Female
24.63
10.39
58.38
6.59
100
Male
24.59
10.82
61.45
3.15
100
Educated
26.09
10.33
60.15
3.42
100
Uneducated
20.95
11.14
58.4
9.5
100
Below 25 years
23.79
7.26
64.37
4.58
100
26-40 years
25.56
10.28
59.56
4.6
100
41 years and above
23.85
13
56.85
6.3
100
Central
45.24
4
35.26
15.5
100
Eastern
27.75
13.46
57.65
1.14
100
Western
17.84
11.46
67.1
3.59
100
Others
19.81
13.42
65.43
1.34
100
Farmer/housewife
26.18
10.45
55.21
8.16
100
Business
22.59
11.11
64.04
2.26
100
Civil servant
29.51
10.09
55.05
5.35
100
Private employee
17.21
11.2
71.59
0
100
Student
29.62
6.62
58.81
4.95
100
Gender
Education status
Age
Region
Occupation
35
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
4. RECOMMENDATIONS
This National Corruption Barometer Survey (NCBS) has covered a representative number of Bhutanese from
different age groups, educational backgrounds, gender, and place of residence, among others. Based on the
findings, we make the following recommendations:
1) Owing to the culture of a high level of acceptance of corruption among the Bhutanese and a low willingness
to report corruption, BTI and anti-corruption organizations must make concerted efforts to educate the
general citizenry and create awareness on the need to combat corruption collectively;
2) Since favouritism and nepotism are the most prevalent forms of corruption in the country, they must be
noted with utmost priority in the corruption prevention strategies and practices by all public as well as
private organisations, and appropriate actions be taken. Furthermore, key institutions such as the ACC,
RCSC and RAA must enhance their vigilance for these forms of corruption, beside others.
3) Since people below the age of 25 are more affected by corruption, and therefore they are concerned
about it, BTI’s efforts to encourage and involve youth to combat corruption must be intensified. It initiatives
like the formation of YES GROUP must be given greater impetus.
4) Since discriminatory and non-uniform application of laws and rules/regulations stands out as the biggest
cause of corruption in the country, BTI must create awareness among various organisations to redress
this problem and make efforts to put the oversight bodies on their heels if corruption is to be prevented
effectively.
5) High-ranking public officials, including the judges, suffer from a serious trust deficit as they are thought
to be the most corrupt. Therefore, BTI must assist ACC in further studying this belief, and redressing the
problem through various strategies and plans.
6) Preferential treatment given to influential people while accessing public service, including health services,
is reported to be a common problem among ordinary citizens. Thus, public servants must be sensitized
on this issue to prevent such acts/conducts.
7) Since a sizeable proportion of the population has pointed out access to justice as difficult, not to mention
people’s poor perception about judges, BTI in collaboration with other oversight bodies must initiate
public discourses on subjects like ‘who acts as the oversight body over the judiciary.’
8) Since the general perception among the people is that corruption has increased in the country since the
introduction of democracy and it is steadily increasing, there is an urgent need for the Royal Government
of Bhutan as well as other national and international organisations who provide support for improving
good governance in public organisations to provide support to BTI.
36
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
5. CONCLUSION
In terms of the prevalence of various forms of corruption in the country, favouritism and nepotism in recruitment,
promotion and transfer topped the list. The types and causes of corruption prevalent in the country are diverse,
but the significant ones are uncontrolled discrimination, non-uniform application of laws, rules and norms, unclear
and lengthy procedures, lack of information and transparency, inability to implement codes of conduct and ethics
in the work place, inefficient service delivery, social demands and obligations and systemic flaws.
As far as the concentration of corruption in the country is concerned, it is highly concentrated in the top echelons
of all organosations, including constitutional bodies, the private sector, NGOs, local government, autonomous
agencies and corporations or government.
Notwithstanding a series of anti-corruption initiatives, the level of corruption in the country is thought to be on
the rise since the introduction of democracy. This strongly calls for organisations like the ACC and the BTI to
urgently buff up their anti-corruption activities/programs and the RGOB to address good governance issues much
more seriously than ever before if Bhutan is to achieve its aspirations for a fair, equitable, harmonious and happy
society.
37
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
REFERENCES
(n.d.). The Constitution of The Kingdom of Bhutan.
Anti-Corruption Commission. (2008). CORRUPTION PERCEPTION SURVEY 2007. Anti-Corruption Commission.
Smith, S. (2013, 04 08). Determining Sample Size: How to Ensure You Get the Correct Sample Size. Retrieved
from Qualtrics: https://www.qualtrics.com/blog/determining-sample-size/
Wayne W. Daniel, C. L. (2013). Biostatistics: A Foundation for Analysis in the Health Sciences, 10th Edition.
Edwards BrothersMalloy.
38
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
ANNEXES
ANNEX 1: Tables and Figures
1.93
Fronting involving Bhutanese to Bhutanese
1.94
Privatization of public institutions for private gains
Collusion between public and private in procurement
1.95
Electoral fraud
1.95
Collusion between private and private in procurement
1.96
Fronting involving Bhutanese to non-Bhutanese
1.96
1.97
Prosecution of corruption cases
2.01
Misuse of human resources
Misuse of public assets
2.04
Taking and giving bribes
2.04
Delaying decision/action deliberately for corrupt motives
2.05
Misuse of public facilities
2.05
2.09
Misuse of public funds
2.21
Nepotism, favoritism (recruitment, promotion, transfer, etc.)
1.70
1.80
1.90
2.00
2.10
Mean score (1 -3)
2.20
2.30
Figure A1: Mean score of views on the forms of corruption prevalent in the country
Table A1: Experiences of accessing certain essential government services
And how often, if ever, did you have to pay a bribe, give a gift, or do a
favour for a teacher or school official in order to get the services you
A. In the past 12 months have you needed from the schools?
had contact with a public school?
Once
Often%
Few times%
Never% Don’t know%
twice%
0.1
0.2
1.3
48.4
0.4
And how often, if ever, did you have to pay a bribe, give a gift, or do a
favour for a health worker or clinic or hospital staff in order to get the
B. In the past 12 months have you medical care you needed?
had contact with a public clinic or hosOnce
pital?
Often%
Few times%
Never% Don’t know%
twice%
0.3
0.8
1.1
68.3
0.6
C. In the past 12 months have you And how often, if ever, did you have to pay a bribe, give a gift, or do a fatried to get an identity document like vour for a government official in order to get the document you needed? a birth certificate, driver’s license,
Once
Often%
Few times%
Never% Don’t know%
passport or voter’s card, or a permit,
twice%
from the government?
0.1
0.5
2.0
32.8
0.1
And how often, if ever, did you have to pay a bribe, give a gift, or do a faD. In the past 12 months have you vour for a government official in order to get the services you needed?
tried to get water, sanitation or electric
Once
Often%
Few times%
Never% Don’t know%
services from the government? twice%
0
39
0.3
1.1
23.8
0.5
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
And how often, if ever, did you have to pay a bribe, give a gift, or do a favour for a police officer in order to get the assistance you needed, or to
E. In the past 12 months have you avoid a problem like passing a checkpoint or avoiding a fine or arrest? had contact with the police?
Few times
Once twice
Often %
Never % Don’t know %
%
%
0.2
0.2
0.8
14.6
0.1
And how often, if ever, did you have to pay a bribe, give a gift, or do
a favour for a judge or court official in order to get the assistance you
F. In the past 12 months have you had needed from the courts? contact with the courts?
Once
Often%
Few times%
Never% Don’t know%
twice%
0.0
0.1
0.4
8.2
0.0
And how often, if ever, did you have to pay a bribe, give a gift, or do
a favour for a judge or court official in order to get the assistance you
G. In the past 12 months have you needed from the G2C Services?
had contact with the G2C Services? Once
Often%
Few times%
Never% Don’t know%
twice%
0.2
0.1
0.4
21.6
Unclear rules with loopholes for manipulation
2.0
Non-enforcement of rules and procedures
2.0
Low moral values
2.0
Needs (sheer necessity, basic minimum not met)
2.1
Unfair business competition and practices
2.1
Inaction of cases reported
2.1
Poor or no proper accountability mechanism
2.1
0.5
2.1
Lack of information and transparency on rules &…
2.4
Weak leaderships at all levels
Wants (greedy, never enough)
2.4
Strong protective social net of the accused
2.4
Weak and ineffective media
2.5
2.6
Lengthy procedures
2.9
Discriminatory & non-uniform application of laws…
0.0
1.0
2.0
Mean score (1 -3)
3.0
Figure A2: Mean score of views on the causes of corruption prevalent in the country
40
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
1.8
Constitutional bodies
2.0
1.8
Private sector
2.0
1.8
NGOs
2.0
1.8
Local government
2.0
1.8
Autonomous agencies
2.0
1.8
Corporation
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
Mean score (1 - 3)
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.0
1.9
Government
2.2
2.2
2.1
2.2
2.0
2.5
More at the lower supervisory/support and operational level
More at the middle administrative and managerial level
More at the top decision making level
Figure A3: Mean score of views on the concentration of corruption in the country
Table A2: Views on individuals involved in corruption
How many of the following people do you think are involved in corruption, or haven’t you heard enough
about them to say?
All of
them%
Most of
them%
Some of
them%
None%
Don’t know/
Haven’t heard%
Business executives
2.4
14.7
56.1
13.1
13.8
Charity or Aid workers
1.0
3.6
41.4
32.1
21.8
Religious leaders
0.9
4.3
33.0
41.8
20.0
Judges and Magistrates
0.7
31.8
63.2
2.7
1.7
The Prime Minister and Ministers in his
Cabinet
0.8
6.9
48.3
21.8
22.2
Journalists and media personnel
0.7
4.0
36.3
32.4
26.6
Government officials
0.6
9.1
65.2
11.5
13.7
Tax Officials, like Ministry of Finance officials or Local Government tax collectors
0.6
6.7
52.1
21.0
19.6
Traditional leaders
0.5
4.2
34.4
35.8
24.9
Teachers and education personnel in
schools, colleges etc.
0.5
7.7
29.3
50.0
12.6
Police
0.5
9.3
62.0
16.6
11.7
Members of Parliament
0.3
6.6
54.1
18.5
20.5
Local government officials
0.3
7.4
63.0
15.8
13.6
Doctors, nurses and health service personnel
0.2
8.9
53.9
24.2
12.8
Involved in corruption
41
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
4
Mean score (1 - 5)
3.9
3.8
3.7
3.6
3.93 3.92 3.92
3.89 3.88
3.75 3.73
3.72 3.71
3.69 3.69 3.69
3.65
3.62 3.6 3.6
3.57
3.54
3.5
3.4
3.3
Figure A4: Mean score of satisfaction with the quality of service delivery
42
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
ANNEX 2: Survey Questionnaire
CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE – 2016
IDENTIFICATION
Urban/Rural: ___________________________
Dzongkha: _____________________________
Gewog/Town: __________________________
Chiwog: _______________________________
DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
1. Sex: _______________ (m/f)
2. Age (in completed years): ________________
3. Marital status:
a) Never married
b) Living together
c) Married
d) Widowed
e) Divorced
4. Highest level of educational attainment:
a) No formal education
b) Primary education (vi)
c) Lower Secondary (viii)
d) Middle Secondary (x)
e) Higher Secondary (xii)
f) Diploma/certificate
g) Bachelor’s degree
h) Post graduate
i) Non-formal education
5. Occupation:
a) Civil servant
b) Parliamentarian
c) Business
d) Private employee
e) Corporate employee
f) Armed force personal
g) Farmer/housewife
h) Student
i) Local government employee
j) Monk/Num/Gomchen
k) /NGOs
l) Constitutional bodies
m) Other
a. Specify other: _________________________
43
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
BTI1. What are the forms of corruption prevalent in our country?
Forms of corruption
Strongly
agree
Partly
agree
Disagree
Don’t
know
Declined
Disagree
Don’t
know
Declined
Nepotism, favoritism (recruitment, promotion,
transfer, etc.)
Misuse of public funds
Taking and giving bribes
Misuse of human resources
Delaying decision/action deliberately for corrupt
motives
Misuse of public facilities
Misuse of public assets
Collusion between public and private in
procurement
Fronting involving Bhutanese to Bhutanese
Fronting involving Bhutanese to non-Bhutanese
Privatization of public institutions for private
gains
Collusion between private and private in
procurement
Electoral fraud
Prosecution of corruption cases
BTI2. What are the causes of corruption prevalent in our country?
Causes of corruption
Strongly
agree
Partly
agree
Wants (greedy, never enough)
Needs (sheer necessity, basic minimum not
met)
Discriminatory & non-uniform application of laws
and rules
Lack of information and transparency on rules &
procedures
Inaction of cases reported
Strong protective social net of the accused
Unfair business competition and practices
Unclear rules with loopholes for manipulation
Weak leaderships at all levels
Non-enforcement of rules and procedures
Poor or no proper accountability mechanism
Social demands and obligations
Lengthy procedures
Too many rules to follow
Weak and ineffective media
Inefficient service delivery
Low moral values
44
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
BTI3a. In your opinion, where is corruption most concentrated in Government?
Level
Strongly
agree
Partly
agree
Disagree
Don’t
know
Declined
Don’t
know
Declined
More at the top decision making level
More at the middle administrative and
managerial level
More at the lower supervisory/support and
operational level
BTI3b. In your opinion, where is corruption most concentrated in Corporation?
Level
Strongly
agree
Partly
agree
Disagree
More at the top decision making level
More at the middle administrative and
managerial level
More at the lower supervisory/support and
operational level
BTI3c. In your opinion, where is corruption most concentrated in Autonomous agencies?
Level
Strongly
agree
Partly
agree
Disagree
Don’t
know
Declined
More at the top decision making level
More at the middle administrative and
managerial level
More at the lower supervisory/support and
operational level
BTI3d. In your opinion, where is corruption most concentrated in Local government?
Level
Strongly
agree
Partly
agree
Disagree
Don’t
know
Declined
Don’t
know
Declined
Don’t
know
Declined
More at the top decision making level
More at the middle administrative and
managerial level
More at the lower supervisory/support and
operational level
BTI3e. In your opinion, where is corruption most concentrated in NGOs?
Level
Strongly
agree
Partly
agree
Disagree
More at the top decision making level
More at the middle administrative and
managerial level
More at the lower supervisory/support and
operational level
BTI3f. In your opinion, where is corruption most concentrated in Private sector?
Level
Strongly
agree
Partly
agree
Disagree
More at the top decision making level
More at the middle administrative and
managerial level
More at the lower supervisory/support and
operational level
45
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
BTI3g. In your opinion, where is corruption most concentrated in Constitutional bodies?
Level
Strongly
agree
Partly
agree
Disagree
Don’t
know
Declined
More at the top decision making level
More at the middle administrative and
managerial level
More at the lower supervisory/support and
operational level
BTI4. Have you faced any problem while availing the following services?
Level
Yes
No
Don’t
know
Not
availed
Declined
Agriculture services
Land transaction services
Education services
Banking Services
Travel Document services
Government clearances services
Health services
Licensing services
Immigration and census services
Labor permits and inspection services
Auditing services
Police services
Judiciary services
Construction services
City/Municipal services/Thromde
Corporate services (BPC, Bhutan Telecom, etc.)
Procurement services
Finance services (payment, releases, etc.)
Local Government services
Administrative/management services
Private services
Religious and monastic Services
NGOs services
Services not mentioned
Others (specify):________________________________
BTI4a. If so, what are the problems you encountered?
Level
‘multiple options’
Personnel related problems
Poor infrastructure related problems
Lack of facility
System related problem
Discrimination between rich and poor, gender, caste, etc.
46
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
Poor service delivery
TA/DA and others
Others (specify): ________________________________
BTI5. In your opinion, has the level of corruption in this country increased, decreased, or stayed the
same after the introduction of democracy?
Increased a lot
1
Increased somewhat
2
Stayed the same
3
Decreased somewhat
4
Decreased a lot
5
Don’t know [Do not read]
9
BTI6. How satisfied are you with the quality of service delivery of the following sectors/orgs.?
Very
satisfied
Satisfied
Neutral
Dissatisfied
Very
dissatisfied
MOA : Ministry of Agriculture
MOEA : Ministry of Economic Affairs
MOE : Ministry of Education
MOF : Ministry of Finance
MOFA : Ministry of Foreign Affairs
MOH : Ministry of Health
MOHCA : Ministry of Home and Cultural
Affairs
MOIC : Ministry of Information and
Communications
MOLHR : Ministry of Labour and Human
Resources
MOWHS : Ministry of Works and Human
Settlement
Judiciary
Armed forces
Autonomous agencies
Financial institutions
Corporations
City Corporation
Private sector
Monastic body
Other (specify):
47
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
TI1. In your opinion, what are the most important problems facing this country that government should
address? [Interviewer: Do not read options. Code from responses. Accept up to three answers. If respondent
offers more than three options, ask “Which three of these are the most important?” If respondent offers one or
two answers, ask “Anything else?”] (multiple options)
1st response
2nd
response
3rd response
Economics
…
Food / Agriculture
…
Infrastructure
…
Government Services
…
Health
…
Governance
Corruption
…
Other responses
Don’t know
TI2. How many of the following people do you think are involved in corruption, or haven’t you heard
enough about them to say? [Interviewer: Read out options]
A.
The Prime Minister and Ministers in his
Cabinet
B.
Members of Parliament
C.
Government officials
D.
Local government officials
E.
Police
F.
Tax Officials, like Ministry of Finance
officials or Local Government tax collectors
None
Some
of them
Most of
them
All of
them
Don’t know/
Haven’t heard
[DNR]
G. Judges and Magistrates
H.
Traditional leaders
I.
Religious leaders
J.
Business executives
K.
Teachers and education personnel in
schools, colleges etc.
L.
Journalists and media personnel
M.
Doctors, nurses and health service
personnel
N.
Charity or Aid workers
48
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
TI3. In your opinion, over the past year, has the level of corruption in this country increased, decreased,
or stayed the same? [Interviewer: Probe for strength of opinion.]
Increased a lot
Increased somewhat
Stayed the same
Decreased somewhat
Decreased a lot
Don’t know [Do not read]
Now I would like to talk to you about experiences that some people have in accessing certain essential
government services.
TI4. In the past 12 months have you had contact with a public school? [Interviewer: If ‘no’, circle 7 and
continue to next question. If yes, continue with part A below]: [Read out options]
A.
And how often, if ever, did you
have to pay a bribe, give a gift,
or do a favour for a teacher or
school official in order to get the
services you needed from the
schools?
No contact
[DNR]
Never
Once or
twice
A few
times
Often
Don’t
Know
[DNR]
TI4. In the past 12 months have you had contact with a public clinic or hospital? [Interviewer: If ‘no’,
circle 7 and continue to next question. If yes, continue with parts B below]: [Read out options]
B.
And how often, if ever, did you
have to pay a bribe, give a
gift, or do a favour for a health
worker or clinic or hospital staff
in order to get the medical care
you needed?
No contact
[DNR]
Never
Once or
twice
A few
times
Often
Don’t
Know
[DNR]
I4. In the past 12 months have you tried to get an identity document like a birth certificate, driver’s license, passport or voter’s card, or a permit, from government? [Interviewer: If ‘no’, circle 7 and continue
to next question. If yes, continue with part C below] : [Read out options]
C.
And how often, if ever, did you
have to pay a bribe, give a gift,
or do a favour for a government
official in order to get the document you needed?
49
No contact
[DNR]
Never
Once or
twice
A few
times
Often
Don’t
Know
[DNR]
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
TI4. In the past 12 months have you tried to get water, sanitation or electric services from government? [Interviewer: If ‘no’, circle 7 and continue to next question. If yes, continue with part D below]: [Read out options]
D.
And how often, if ever, did you
have to pay a bribe, give a gift,
or do a favour for a government
official in order to get the services you needed?
No contact
[DNR]
Never
Once or
twice
A few
times
Often
Don’t
Know
[DNR]
TI4. In the past 12 months have you had contact with the police? [Interviewer: If ‘no’, circle 7 and
continue to next question. If yes, continue with part E below]: [Read out options]
E.
And how often, if ever, did you
have to pay a bribe, give a gift,
or do a favour for a police officer
in order to get the assistance
you needed, or to avoid a problem like passing a checkpoint or
avoiding a fine or arrest?
No contact
[DNR]
Never
Once or
twice
A few
times
Often
Don’t
Know
[DNR]
TI4. In the past 12 months have you had contact with the courts? [Interviewer: If ‘no’, circle 7 and continue to next question. If yes, continue with part F below]: [Read out options]
F.
And how often, if ever, did you
have to pay a bribe, give a gift,
or do a favour for a judge or
court official in order to get the
assistance you needed from the
courts?
No contact
[DNR]
Never
Once or
twice
A few
times
Often
Don’t
Know
[DNR]
TI4.G In the past 12 months have you had contact with the G2C Services? [Interviewer: If ‘no’, circle 7
and continue to next question. If yes, continue with part F below]: [Read out options]
G.
And how often, if ever, did you
have to pay a bribe, give a gift,
or do a favour for a judge or
court official in order to get the
assistance you needed from the
G2C Services?
No contact
[DNR]
Never
Once or
twice
A few
times
Often
Don’t
Know
[DNR]
TI5. [If respondent ever reported paying a bribe on TI4B, TI4D, TI4F, TI4H,TI4J or-TI4L:] If you ever paid a
bribe for any of the services discussed above, did you report any of the incidents you mentioned to a
government official or someone in authority?
No
Yes
Not Applicable [i.e., Respondent answered 0=No, 9=DK or 7=NA to all parts of Q4A-L]
[Do not read]
Don’t know [Do not read]
50
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
TI6. [If yes on TI5] Which of the following happened in the most recent time that you reported a bribery
incident? [Interviewer: If response on Q5 is anything other than 1=yes, select 7=Not applicable for both parts
and continue to Q7]
Not applicable (no
incidents reported)
A.
B.
No, didn’t
happen
Yes,
happened
Don’t know
[DNR]
Authorities took action against the
government officials involved.
You suffered retaliation or other
negative consequences as a result of
reporting the incident.
TI7. Some people say that many incidents of corruption are never reported. Based on your experience,
what do you think is the main reason why many people do not report corruption when it occurs? [Interviewer: Do not read options. Code from response. SINGLE ANSWER ALLOWED.]
Most people do report incidents of corruption
0
People don’t have enough time to report it
1
People don’t know where to report it
2
People don’t know how to report it
3
Nothing will be done / It wouldn’t make a difference
4
It’s too expensive to report (e.g. due to travel or phone charges)
5
Corruption is normal / Everyone does it / everyone is involved
6
People are afraid of the consequences
7
The officials where they would report to are also corrupt / officials are involved in the corruption
8
It’s government’s money, not the people’s, so it’s not our problem
9
Social protective net
Other [specify] _____________________________________________________
Post Code Don’t know
TI7B. Looking at the ruling and opposition political parties in this country, which would you say is
most able to address the following matters, or haven’t you heard enough to say? [Interviewer: Probe for
strength of opinion]
Ruling
party
Opposition
party or
parties
1
2
Fighting corruption in government
Neither of DK / Haven’t heard
them [DNR]
enough [DNR]
3
Both
9
TI8. How well or badly would you say the current government is handling the following matters, or
haven’t you heard enough to say? [Interviewer: Probe for strength of opinion]
Very
Badly
Fairly
Badly
Fairly
Well
Very
Well
DK / Haven’t
heard enough
[DNR]
A. Fighting corruption in government
B. Promoting good governance
C. Upholding respect for the rule of law
51
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016
TI9. What is the most effective thing that an ordinary person like you can do to help combat corruption
in this country? [Interviewer: Do not read options. Code from response. SINGLE ANSWER ALLOWED.]
Nothing / Ordinary people cannot do anything
0
Refuse to pay bribes
1
Report corruption when you see or experience it
2
Vote for clean candidates or parties or for parties that promise to fight corruption
3
Speak out about the problem, for example, by calling a radio program or writing a letter
4
Talk to friends and relatives about the problem
5
Sign a petition asking for a stronger fight against corruption
6
Join or support an organization that is fighting corruption
7
Other [specify] ___________________________________________________
Post Code
Don’t know [Do not read]
TI10. Please tell me whether you agree or disagree with the following statements [Interviewer: Probe for
strength of opinion.]
Strongly
Disagree
disagree
Neither agree
nor disagree
[Do not read]
Agree
Don’t
Strongly
know [Do
agree
not read]
A. Ordinary people can make a
difference in the fight against
corruption
B. In our society it is generally
acceptable for people to report a case
of corruption they have witnessed
C. If I would witness an act of
corruption, I would feel personally
obliged to report it
D. I would report a case of corruption
even if I would have to spend a day in
court to give evidence
ACCQ1. I now want to ask you about the “Anti-Corruption Commission” in this country.
Never
heard
of them
Heard the name, but
don’t know anything
about what they do
A fair
amount
A great
deal
Don’t
know
Refused
How much, if anything, do
you know about the “AntiCorruption Commission”?
[Interviewer: Probe for strength.
If ‘Never heard of them’ at Q1
circle ‘0’ at Q2]
Never
heard of
them
Very
Badly
Fairly
Badly
Fairly
Well
Very
Well
DK / Haven’t
heard enough
[DNR]
ACCQ2. How well or badly would you
say the “Anti-Corruption Commission”
is doing at fighting corruption in this
country? [Interviewer: Probe for strength of
opinion. If ‘Never heard of them’ at Q1 circle
‘0’ at Q2]
52
NATIONAL CORRUPTION BAROMETER SURVEY (NCBS) 2016